Talk:Noam Elkies/Archive 1

Archive 1

Youngest Putnam Fellow?

I think it's worth mentioning that Elkies might be the youngest Putnam Fellow ever. [1] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pantaallou (talk • contribs) 16:43, December 27, 2005 (UTC)

I think winning the competition at the age of sixteen years and four months is noteworthy. I could find out and note if he was the youngest Putnam Fellow ever, but then my research would be labelled 'original research' and deleted by fellow Wikipedians. Giftlite 00:38, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Not True

Elkies is in fact not the youngest Putnam Fellow ever. Arthur Rubin was a Putnam fellow 4 times (1970-73). He was born in 1956 so he was at must 14 years and 11 months of age when the Putnam was held in December. I don't know if Rubin is the youngest ever, but certainly Elkies is not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.211.181.171 (talk) 02:29, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

2-time IMO Gold Medalist

The years were 1981 and 1982, someone with a better writing skill can add that in.

Noam Elkies is Jewish

I don't understand why my edit is being continually reverted. If the issue is MoS, then we can accommodate, but reverting a fact is ridiculous. He is Jewish, and as an encyclopedia that should not be censored. Wikifan12345 (talk) 00:32, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

This has ZERO to do with censorship. Please read WP:MOSBIO. Ethnicity is covered under family life or background or not at all. It is NOT coveredin the lead sentence UNLESS is is the primary reason for the person's notability, ie see Leo Frank, we point out that he was a Jew because of the background concerning his case. Sorry if I am biting, but this has been a problem for quite some time. Anyways, if you need to discuss this further, no problem, --Tom 00:40, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

PS, if you want to add his ethnicity in the article, please do so outside the lead sentence and provide a source. Also, it would be nice if it read well, ie Elkies was born to a Jewish family yadda yadda yadda, rather than just saying, Elkies is Jewish, but whatever. Again, I hope this makes sense. Also, look at the 1,000s of bio of Jewish Americans and see how this is working into the article. Cheers! --Tom 00:47, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Wait, so we need background information to list that he is Jewish? He is a Jew, there shouldn't have to be a justification for listing other than the fact that he is Jewish. I'm searching through this article you threw at me but I don't see anything that says this cannot be done. So??

You know he is a Jew? Yes, we need a WP:RS that shows that. I am sure that can be found if true. We don't use what people "know" in this project, thank godness. Also rember to sign your posts :) Cheers, ps read the part under how to list Nationality, it reads:Ethnicity should generally not be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability.--Tom 00:55, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) Is is me, or is saying, this guy is a Jew, offensive? Anyways, I am going to play xbox with my youngin, continue later, cheers! --Tom 00:59, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Ahhh...how is it offensive? It's a fact LOL. I just felt considering this is a fact, I mean...his name is Noam....then it should stated. I'll see if I can find a reliable source but it's a known fact that he is Jewish and isn't simply my opinion LOL. I would have preferred if people simply put "citation needed" or something instead of totally deleting a blatant truth. Wikifan12345 (talk) 01:07, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Tom is correct here. Per WP:BLP, you shouldn't insert material into BLPs unless it's properly sourced. Also, ethnicity doesn't go in the lede of an article. If he's Jewish, there should be some reliable source that says so. Jayjg ^(talk) 01:25, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

But again, you didn't have to delete a fact. You could have put "citation needed" or simply found a source yourself. Wikifan12345 (talk) 02:43, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

NO. Read the responses above. The problem with your edits is only in part (although it's a big part) the lack of sources. Even if you find sources, though, it shouldn't go into the lede (and likely not even into the whole article) unless it's an important aspect of Elkies' notability. We don't write that people are left-handed-American, or that they're blonde-American, or that they're sixth-generation-American, unless their handedness or their hair color or the length of time their family has been in the country is somehow relevant. Same for religion and ethnicity. —David Eppstein (talk) 03:14, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Uh, and what are the laws for Jewish notability? You're putting too much thought on this. There are thousands of articles with single sentence "He/She/[name here]" is Jewish" without any background story. Comparing it to right-handedness/blondness is very odd, and I don't know your reasoning for such a comparison. Wikifan12345 (talk) 03:26, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

My reasoning is that they're both irrelevant. What's odd about that? As for the thousands of others: see WP:WAX. If religion was mentioned in those other articles with as little care for sourcing and relevance as you seem to be exhibiting here, it should be removed. And I have to admit to being a bit troubled by your focus on Jewishness and Jewishness alone: why do you not mention the articles that mention someone's Buddhist or Jain or Zoroastrian faith? —David Eppstein (talk) 03:41, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Um, obviously you're very unaware of dynamics of Judaism. He was born Jewish. It's an ethnicity. Noam could very well be muslim for all I know, but he's ethnically Jewish, and the article should say that. It's a notable fact, not a hairstyle. It's rather weird of you to compare Jewishness to color of one's hair....that truly is bizarre. Wikifan12345 (talk) 03:48, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Regardless of your bizarre beliefs about blood purity, WP:MOSBIO says that religion AND ethnicity don't go in unless they're important, and WP:BLP says they don't go in unless they're sourced. —David Eppstein (talk) 03:50, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Blood purity? WTF? Let's just erase American and put in homosapien. Yeah, that's way more politically correct. You aren't explaining what constitutes important. How important does one have to be before their ethnicity can be listed? He is Jewish, what the is the friggin problem man. It's not controversial, it's not POV-pushing, it's simply fact. A notable fact. Screw it, I'll just get an arbitration this is utterly absurd. Wikifan12345 (talk) 04:17, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

I suggest you do that, Wikifan12345. You'll be told the same, in no uncertain terms. FWIW this, taken together with your conversation on David Eppstein, makes you appear a little obsessed with the notion of who is & who is not jewish, something that comes across as very very creepy indeed. --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:47, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Just a couple points of order: 1) WP:MOSBIO says that ethnicity does not go in the lead, it does not say or mean that ethnicity can't go anywhere in the article. Most "well written" bios do cover ethnicity under a family/early life section (provide source of course) where it flows and reads well and is not just crammed into the article for whatever "purpose" and defineately NOT in the first sentence UNLESS it is the reason for the person's notability.(haven't we covered this?) 2) WP:WAX seems to be more about article deletions rather that specific material in an article. Anyways, at this point, Wikifan12345, I have assumed good faith, but based on your comments on the David Eppstein talk page I have to ask if you have an agenda to promote in editing in this project, and if so, please say what it is, I can handle it, I am a big boy--Tom 15:00, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

UH, my agenda is truth. He is Jewish, it is a fact. F-a-c-t. First you said the source was weak, ok I found another source. Then you whipped out these rules, so I changed the placement of the sentence. Now you say I have a hidden agenda. FRICK MAN. Why is this such a huge deal? Half the article isn't cited, why the arbitrary obsession with sourcing? I found a source, he is Jewish, we know he's Jewish. This is wikipedia, right? You know, the place where we put it notable facts in articles...yeah, and don't accuse people who try as being racist. Hmmmm...

If the problem is simply fact placement, you could have said that from the beginning instead of leading me on with these ridiculous excuses. You should be trying to accommodate this and not fight it...I could make an infobox, or a little personal section, or something, but don't stonewall me and imply I'm trying to paint wikipedia with Jew. Wikifan12345 (talk) 00:35, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

You going to stick with that "story"? OK. Anyways, I already said I don't care if you add that he is Jewish to the article as long as it is sourced. Are we done here? --Tom 14:54, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I provided sources. Wikifan12345 (talk) 05:42, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Comment

May I point out that Wikipedia's own List of Jewish American mathematicians lists Noam Elkies? Correctly, I should add. I see no reason why the information should be stated there but not here. I am therefore restoring it here. 129.49.7.125 (talk) 02:35, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

That page sources the information only to a web site, jinfo.org — is there any reason we should treat it as reliable? We certainly can't use our own internal link as a source. —David Eppstein (talk) 02:47, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Why is the information relevant on List of Jewish American mathematicians (where the source has not been challenged, and where most of the entries are not sourced at all) but it's not relevant on the guy's own article? 129.49.7.125 (talk) 04:52, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Other sources [2] and [3] and [4]. Regarding relevance, see my last comment. 129.49.7.125 (talk) 05:00, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I am concerned about the adherence of List of Jewish American mathematicians to WP:BLP but I'm not sure it would be helpful to kick up a big fuss about that right now. But I don't see why we should let its lack of standards spread elsewhere. Allexperts is just a mirror of Wikipedia, no? What evidence do you have that your other web links are reliable sources? As for relevance, please demonstrate that his Judaism (as yet unproven to my satisfaction, though I expect it's likely true) has been an important influence in his life and/or his mathematics. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:59, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Again, I don't believe that we have to show that his Judaism (as yet unproven to my satisfaction, though I expect it's likely true) has been an important influence in his life and/or his mathematics in order to include his ethnicity. Most bios cover family ethnicity, whether its "relevant" or not. I also found this for what its worth. What we need is a reliable source for ethnicity and then I have no problem adding it into the bio. Other than relevance, which I don't think is a reason for non inclusion, do you have other concerns? --Tom 14:39, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I'll accept that as a reliable source, since he does refer to himself as "a Jew" in it. But I still think we should consider relevance. —David Eppstein (talk) 15:22, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

If he considers himself a Jew, and there is a source for it, I certainly think it warrants at least one sentence. This in combination with his investment with Jewish-related programs at Harvard (such as the Israel Review) and his writings, which should be viewed as "reliable" since it comes straight from his own personal website: The Passover Haggadah according to Steven Pinker? Wikifan12345 (talk) 03:59, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

How about a compromise - link to List of Jewish American mathematicians in a "See also" section? That implies he's a Jewish American mathematician but doesn't say so explicitly. I think that might help readers while avoiding the "relevance" issue to some extent. It just says "his name is listed here, make of it what you will." 129.49.7.125 (talk) 18:19, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

At this point I'm really not in the mood to get blocked/banned/whatever for inserting information that some people might consider promoting racism, so I'll leave it up to any one else who is willing. :D I endorse the see also section. Wikifan12345 (talk) 03:40, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) IP, I have to say that I would be very opposed to the "see also" "solution/compromise". I spend alot of time working to have See also sections comply with WP:SEEALSO, and hate seeing articles there because they are "implying" something. Again, I do not believe there is any policy or guideline for not including ethicity due to "relevance" EXCEPT in the lead sentence or section per WP:MOSBIO. My personal beef is when I see ethnicity just "listed" in the bio in no context. The best thing would be to craft a family or early life section which talks about his upbring, ie born into a Jewish family ect. Maybe I can try to craft something that everybody can live with and no one gets banned or blocked :)Tom 04:25, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. The current article has a source listing his affiliation with the Israel Review at Harvard, and his own website which I listed above contains a few links about his ethnic background if I remember. You could craft it around his experience in music, or historial opinions, I don't know. IMO he clearly is Jewish, that can no longer be argued, and he has done little to separate himself from this group and has been involved various-related activities. I personally think a simple sentence with a source is enough, can't see how it is less notable than the house he lived in at Harvard. Wikifan12345 (talk) 05:03, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Noam Elkies' personal Harvard webpage makes it abundantly clear that he's Jewish. See, for example, http://www.math.harvard.edu/~elkies/other.html. And if you're too lazy to read through this webpage, here is a quote from him: "Yet another Morning Prayers talk, which I was asked to give on October 1, 2008, the second day of Rosh Ha-Shanah 5769. I describe some of the rituals and traditions of the High Holy Day season, including one that resonates with a familiar line from the “Lord's Prayer” text that concludes each Morning Prayers service".--Mozart20d (talk) 07:06, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

At age 28

The reference supporting the claim "...At age 28" seems to be gone down. In any case I wonder if it is exhaustive, see for example when E. O. Wilson says: "I was thus promoted—I think I was 28". In any case the whole "surpassing" bit seems irrelevant and tangential to me. Solomon7968 18:03, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

I considered removing it as no objections were raised here. Solomon7968 07:52, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Noam Elkies. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061113221122/http://www.d.umn.edu/~jgallian/putnam05.pdf to http://www.d.umn.edu/~jgallian/putnam05.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:48, 24 December 2017 (UTC)